Species Diversity Report

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Species Diversity Report GEORGE WASHINGTON NATIONAL FOREST APPENDIX F – SPECIES DIVERSITY REPORT APPENDIX F – SPECIES DIVERSITY REPORT George Washington National Forest April 2011 Updated February 2013 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT F - i APPENDIX F – SPECIES DIVERSITY REPORT GEORGE WASHINGTON NATIONAL FOREST This page left intentionally blank F - ii FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT GEORGE WASHINGTON NATIONAL FOREST APPENDIX F – SPECIES DIVERSITY REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………….1 2.0 Species Diversity………………………………………………………………………………………………1 2.1 Ecosystem Context for Species……………...……………………………………………………..…………1 2.2 Identification and Screening of Species……………………………………………………….……………2 3.0 Threatened and Endangered Species …………………………………………………………………3 3.1 Threatened and Endangered Species List…………..…………………………………………..…………3 3.2 Threatened and Endangered Species Descriptions and Needed Plan Components ………4 3.2.1 Indiana Bat………………………………………………………………………………………………...………4 3.2.2 Virginia Big-Eared Bat……………………………………………………………………………………….15 3.2.3 Virginia Northern Flying Squirrel..………………………………………………. …….18 3.2.4 James Spinymussel ………………………………………………………………………………………….22 3.2.5 Madison Cave Isopod……………………………………………………………………………….………..26 3.2.6 Shale Barren Rock Cress……………………………………………………………………………..…..…28 3.2.7 Smooth Cone Flower……………………………………………………………………………………..…..32 3.2.8 Virginia Sneezeweed……………………………………………………….……………………..……….…33 3.2.9 Swamp Pink ……………………………………………………………….……………………….……………36 3.2.10 Northeastern Bulrush…………………………………………………………………………..………..….37 3.3 Threatened and Endangered Species Summary of Plan Components ……………….…………40 4.0 Other Species Addressed……………………………………………………………………..……..…..41 4.1 Species list…………………………………………………………………………………………………..………41 4.2 Species Groups…………………………………………………………………………………………..….…….41 4.2.1 Alkaline Glade and Barren Associates ..................................................................................................... 43 4.2.2 Calciphile Associates .............................................................................................................................. 43 4.2.3 Cave Associates ...................................................................................................................................... 45 4.2.4 Cavity Tree, Den Tree and Snag Associates .......................................................................................... 46 4.2.5 Cliff, Talus and Large Rock Outcrop Associates .................................................................................... 46 4.2.6 Cove Forest Associates ........................................................................................................................... 47 4.2.7 Fire Dependent and Fire Enhanced Associates ....................................................................................... 47 4.2.8 Hard and Soft Mast Associates ............................................................................................................... 48 4.2.9 High Elevation Coniferous, Deciduous and/or Mixed Forest Associates ............................................... 49 4.2.10 Late Successional Hardwood Dominated Forest Associates ................................................................. 50 4.2. 11 Area Sensitive Mature Coniferous, Deciduous, and/or Mixed Forest Associates ................................. 51 4.2.12 Lepidopterans ........................................................................................................................................ 51 4.2.13 Mafic Rock Associates .......................................................................................................................... 52 4.2.14 Species Needing Occurrence Protection ............................................................................................... 52 4.2.15 Open Area Associates ............................................................................................................................ 54 4.2.15a Area Sensitive Grassland and Shrubland and Open Woodlands Associates ....................................... 54 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT F - iii APPENDIX F – SPECIES DIVERSITY REPORT GEORGE WASHINGTON NATIONAL FOREST 4.2.15.b Area Sensitive Grasslands Associates ................................................................................................ 55 4.2.15.c Area Sensitive Shrubland and Open Woodland Associates ............................................................... 55 4.2.15.d Grassland Associates .......................................................................................................................... 55 4.2.15.e High Elevation Opening (Grassy Or Shrubby) or Open Woodland Associates ................................. 56 4.2.15.f Shrubland Associates .......................................................................................................................... 57 4.2.15.g Regenerating Forest Associates.......................................................................................................... 58 4.2.15.h Open Woodland Associates ............................................................................................................... 58 4.2.16 Riparian Area Associates ...................................................................................................................... 59 4.2.17 Ruderal Associates ................................................................................................................................. 63 4.2.18 Sandstone Glades and Barrens Associates ............................................................................................ 64 4.2.19 Species Sensitive to Over-Collection .................................................................................................... 64 4.2.20 Species Sensitive to Recreational Traffic .............................................................................................. 64 4.2.21 Shale Barren Associates ........................................................................................................................ 65 4.2.22 Species with Habitat in Special Biologic Areas .................................................................................... 66 5.0 Effects of Alternatives on Species…………………………………………………………………………69 6.0 Plan Components Needed for Species Diversity……………………………………………………82 6.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………..….82 6.2 Species Groups Covered by Ecosystem Diversity Plan Components.…………………………82 6.3.1 Calciphile Associates ............................................................................................................................... 83 6.3.2 Cavity Tree, Den Tree and Snag Associates ........................................................................................... 83 6.3.3 Cliff, Talus and Rock Outcrop Associates .............................................................................................. 84 6.3.4 Hard and Soft Mast Associates ............................................................................................................... 85 6.3.5 High Elevation Coniferous, Deciduous and/or Mixed Forest Associates ................................................ 85 6.3.6 Lepidopterans .......................................................................................................................................... 85 6.3.7 Species Needing Occurrence Protection ................................................................................................. 86 6.3.8 Open Area Associates .............................................................................................................................. 86 6.3.9 Ruderal Associates .................................................................................................................................. 87 6.3.10 Sandstone Glades and Barrens Associates ............................................................................................ 87 6.3.11 Species Sensitive to Over-Collection ..................................................................................................... 87 6.3.12 Species Sensitive to Recreational Traffic .............................................................................................. 87 6.3.13 Species with Habitat in Special Biologic Areas .................................................................................... 88 Literature Cited………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………89 Appendix F-1. Species Not Carried Forward into the Ecological Sustainability Analysis Appendix F-2. Species Groups by Individual Species Appendix F-3. Species Stresses and Threats and Forest Plan Strategies F - iv FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT GEORGE WASHINGTON NATIONAL FOREST APPENDIX F – SPECIES DIVERSITY REPORT 1.0 INTRODUCTION Planning for ecological sustainability is an iterative two-stage process that involves first providing for a diversity of ecosystems and then by developing additional direction to meet the biological needs of specific species or species groups. Most plant and animal species will be sustained by managing for a diversity of ecosystems in the Plan area. However, additional provisions may be needed to help provide ecological conditions for specific species such as federally listed threatened and endangered (T&E) species, sensitive species and locally rare species. This Species Diversity Report is a supplement to the Ecosystem Diversity Report, which described how
Recommended publications
  • Geometrid Larvae of the Alpi Marittime Natural Park
    Geometrid larvae of the Alpi Marittime Natural Park (district of Valdieri, Cuneo, Italy), with descriptions of the larvae of two Gnophini Pierce, 1914 (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Geometridae) Gareth Edward KING Departamento de Biología (Zoología), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28069 Cantoblanco, Madrid (Spain) [email protected] Félix Javier GONZÁLEZ-ESTÉBANEZ Departamento de Biodiversidad y Gestión Ambiental, Universidad de León, 24071 León (Spain) [email protected] Published on 31 December 2015 urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:36697C66-C6FF-4FC0-BD97-303C937A0BEF King G. E. & González-Estébanez F. J. 2015. — Geometrid larvae of the Alpi Marittime Natural Park (district of Valdieri, Cuneo, Italy), with descriptions of the larvae of two Gnophini Pierce, 1914 (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Geometridae), in Daugeron C., Deharveng L., Isaia M., Villemant C. & Judson M. (eds), Mercantour/Alpi Marittime All Taxa Biodiversity Inventory. Zoosystema 37 (4): 621-631. http://dx.doi.org/10.5252/z2015n4a8 KEY WORDS Insecta, ABSTRACT Lepidoptera, Examination of 14 plant families in the Alpi Marittime Alps Natural Park (Valdieri, Italy) resulted in Geometridae, Gnophini, the collection of 103 larvae of 28 geometrid taxa; these belong to three subfamilies, with Ennominae Italy, Duponchel, 1845 being the most representative (13 taxa = 46.4%). Th e fi nal instar (L5) of two taxa Maritime Alps, in the tribe Gnophini Pierce, 1914, Gnophos furvata meridionalis Wehrli, 1924 and Charissa pullata larvae, morphology, ([Denis & Schiff ermüller], 1775) is described, including its chaetotaxy. Biological data and observa- chaetotaxy. tions are provided for all taxa. RÉSUMÉ Les larves de Geometridae collectées dans le Parc naturel des Alpi Marittime (district Valdieri, Cuneo, Italie), MOTS CLÉS Insecta, avec la description des larves de deux espèces de Gnophini Pierce, 1914 (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Geometridae).
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera of North America 5
    Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Lepidoptera of North America 5. Contributions to the Knowledge of Southern West Virginia Lepidoptera by Valerio Albu, 1411 E. Sweetbriar Drive Fresno, CA 93720 and Eric Metzler, 1241 Kildale Square North Columbus, OH 43229 April 30, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration: Blueberry Sphinx (Paonias astylus (Drury)], an eastern endemic. Photo by Valeriu Albu. ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Abstract A list of 1531 species ofLepidoptera is presented, collected over 15 years (1988 to 2002), in eleven southern West Virginia counties. A variety of collecting methods was used, including netting, light attracting, light trapping and pheromone trapping. The specimens were identified by the currently available pictorial sources and determination keys. Many were also sent to specialists for confirmation or identification. The majority of the data was from Kanawha County, reflecting the area of more intensive sampling effort by the senior author. This imbalance of data between Kanawha County and other counties should even out with further sampling of the area. Key Words: Appalachian Mountains,
    [Show full text]
  • Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2
    Insects of Western North America 4. Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Survey of Selected Insect Taxa of Fort Sill, Comanche County, Oklahoma 2. Dragonflies (Odonata), Stoneflies (Plecoptera) and selected Moths (Lepidoptera) by Boris C. Kondratieff, Paul A. Opler, Matthew C. Garhart, and Jason P. Schmidt C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Department of Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 March 15, 2004 Contributions of the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity Colorado State University Cover illustration (top to bottom): Widow Skimmer (Libellula luctuosa) [photo ©Robert Behrstock], Stonefly (Perlesta species) [photo © David H. Funk, White- lined Sphinx (Hyles lineata) [photo © Matthew C. Garhart] ISBN 1084-8819 This publication and others in the series may be ordered from the C.P. Gillette Museum of Arthropod Diversity, Department of Bioagricultural Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Copyrighted 2004 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………….…1 INTRODUCTION…………………………………………..…………………………………………….…3 OBJECTIVE………………………………………………………………………………………….………5 Site Descriptions………………………………………….. METHODS AND MATERIALS…………………………………………………………………………….5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION………………………………………………………………………..…...11 Dragonflies………………………………………………………………………………….……..11
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full Article in PDF Format
    DIRECTEUR DE LA PUBLICATION / PUBLICATION DIRECTOR : Bruno David Président du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle RÉDACTRICE EN CHEF / EDITOR-IN-CHIEF : Laure Desutter-Grandcolas ASSISTANTE DE RÉDACTION / ASSISTANT EDITOR : Anne Mabille ([email protected]) MISE EN PAGE / PAGE LAYOUT : Anne Mabille COMITÉ SCIENTIFIQUE / SCIENTIFIC BOARD : James Carpenter (AMNH, New York, États-Unis) Maria Marta Cigliano (Museo de La Plata, La Plata, Argentine) Henrik Enghoff (NHMD, Copenhague, Danemark) Rafael Marquez (CSIC, Madrid, Espagne) Peter Ng (University of Singapore) Jean-Yves Rasplus (INRA, Montferrier-sur-Lez, France) Jean-François Silvain (IRD, Gif-sur-Yvette, France) Wanda M. Weiner (Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracovie, Pologne) John Wenzel (The Ohio State University, Columbus, États-Unis) COUVERTURE / COVER : Akrophryxus milvus n. gen., n. sp., holotype female, MNHN-IU-2014-20314, attached to Ethusa machaera Castro, 2005, macropod images. Zoosystema est indexé dans / Zoosystema is indexed in: – Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch®) – ISI Alerting Services® – Current Contents® / Agriculture, Biology, and Environmental Sciences® – Scopus® Zoosystema est distribué en version électronique par / Zoosystema is distributed electronically by: – BioOne® (http://www.bioone.org) Les articles ainsi que les nouveautés nomenclaturales publiés dans Zoosystema sont référencés par / Articles and nomenclatural novelties published in Zoosystema are referenced by: – ZooBank® (http://zoobank.org) Zoosystema est une revue en flux continu publiée par les Publications scientifiques du Muséum, Paris / Zoosystema is a fast track journal published by the Museum Science Press, Paris Les Publications scientifiques du Muséum publient aussi / The Museum Science Press also publish: Adansonia, Geodiversitas, Anthropozoologica, European Journal of Taxonomy, Naturae, Cryptogamie sous-sections Algologie, Bryologie, Mycologie. Diffusion – Publications scientifiques Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle CP 41 – 57 rue Cuvier F-75231 Paris cedex 05 (France) Tél.
    [Show full text]
  • Observations on Catocala Marmorata (Noctuidae)
    VOLUME 45, NUMBER 4 373 The seven larvae collected on 31 May were reared on A. canescens; they pupated between 2 and 5 June and eclosed between 22 and 25 June 1991. These observations show that C. abbreviatella, C. whitneyi, and C. amestris all feed on A. canescens in Wisconsin. Catacola whitneyi and C. abbreviatella were found to be sympatric whereas C. amestris was found separately (except for one worn C. amestris adults taken at Muralt on 2 July 1988). We provided several eggs from adult female C. abbreviatella and C. whitneyi captured in 1990 to Wayne Miller who successfully reared them to adults. The two C. whitneyi he reared took about a week longer to develop than C. abbreviatella. Six adults and two preserved larvae have been deposited at the Peabody Museum of Natural History at Yale University and at the Milwaukee Public Museum. We thank Larry Gall, Allen Young, and Mogens Nielsen for helpful suggestions on the manuscript. ROBERT J. BORTH & THOMAS S. BARINA, Wisconsin Gas Company, 626 E. Wisconsin Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202. Received for publication 18 December 1990; revised and accepted 30 September 1991. Journal 0/ the Lepidopterists' Society 45(4), 1991,373-374 OBSERVATIONS ON CATOCALA MARMORATA (NOCTUIDAE) Additional key words: underwing moths, behavior, Virginia, West Virginia, collecting techniq ues. During the past decade I have been studying Catocala marmorata (Edwards) in Virginia and West Virginia. This moth is not as rare as sometimes implied (e.g., Sargent, T. D. 1976, Legion of night, Univ. Massachusetts Press, Amherst, 222 pp.; Covell, C. V. 1984, a field guide to the moths of eastern North America, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, 496 pp.), but rather has a somewhat localized distribution.
    [Show full text]
  • Basal Position of Two New Complete Mitochondrial Genomes of Parasitic
    Hua et al. Parasites & Vectors (2018) 11:628 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-018-3162-4 RESEARCH Open Access Basal position of two new complete mitochondrial genomes of parasitic Cymothoida (Crustacea: Isopoda) challenges the monophyly of the suborder and phylogeny of the entire order Cong J. Hua1,2, Wen X. Li1, Dong Zhang1,2, Hong Zou1, Ming Li1, Ivan Jakovlić3, Shan G. Wu1 and Gui T. Wang1,2* Abstract Background: Isopoda is a highly diverse order of crustaceans with more than 10,300 species, many of which are parasitic. Taxonomy and phylogeny within the order, especially those of the suborder Cymothoida Wägele, 1989, are still debated. Mitochondrial (mt) genomes are a useful tool for phylogenetic studies, but their availability for isopods is very limited. To explore these phylogenetic controversies on the mt genomic level and study the mt genome evolution in Isopoda, we sequenced mt genomes of two parasitic isopods, Tachaea chinensis Thielemann, 1910 and Ichthyoxenos japonensis Richardson, 1913, belonging to the suborder Cymothoida, and conducted comparative and phylogenetic mt genomic analyses across Isopoda. Results: The complete mt genomes of T. chinensis and I. japonensis were 14,616 bp and 15,440 bp in size, respectively, with the A+T content higher than in other isopods (72.7 and 72.8%, respectively). Both genomes code for 13 protein-coding genes, 21 transfer RNA genes (tRNAs), 2 ribosomal RNA genes (rRNAs), and possess a control region (CR). Both are missing a gene from the complete tRNA set: T. chinensis lacks trnS1 and I. japonensis lacks trnI. Both possess unique gene orders among isopods.
    [Show full text]
  • Shale Barren Rock Recovery Plan Cress
    SHALE BARREN ROCK CRESS (Arabis serotina) RECOVERY PLAN Northeast Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Newton Corner, Massachusetts SHALE BARREN ROCK CRESS (Arabis serotina Steele) RECOVERY PLAN Prepared by J. Christopher Ludwig Nancy E. Van Alstine Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Natural Heritage 203 Governor Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 for Northeast Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service One Gateway Center Newton Corner, Massachusetts 02158 Approved: ~ ~ ~4CsRegiona Director, ortheast Region U.S. Fish and Wil life Service Date: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SHALE BARREN ROCK CRESS RECOVERY PLAN Current Status: Thirty-four extant populations and one historical population are known for this species, which was listed as endangered in August 1989. The extant populations are located in six Virginia and three West Virginia counties; the historical population was located in an additional Virginia county. Nineteen populations occur within the Monongahela and George Washington National Forests; of these, 13 have been proposed for further administrative protection. One Virginia population is owned and protected by the Commonwealth, and the protection needs of a West Virginia population on U.S. Navy land are being studied under a 5-year cooperative agreement. No protection has been initiated for the populations on private land. In addition to its Federal listing, the species is listed as endangered in Virginia. Limiting Factors: Arabis serotina is jeopardized by drought, habitat degradation, stochastic events, herbivory, and other biotic factors. Since most of the extant populations have under 100 plants and many have fewer than ten individuals, the species may be vulnerable to local extirpation. Recovery Obiective: To remove Arabis serotina from the list of endangered and threatened species.
    [Show full text]
  • Scenic Landforms of Virginia
    Vol. 34 August 1988 No. 3 SCENIC LANDFORMS OF VIRGINIA Harry Webb . Virginia has a wide variety of scenic landforms, such State Highway, SR - State Road, GWNF.R(T) - George as mountains, waterfalls, gorges, islands, water and Washington National Forest Road (Trail), JNFR(T) - wind gaps, caves, valleys, hills, and cliffs. These land- Jefferson National Forest Road (Trail), BRPMP - Blue forms, some with interesting names such as Hanging Ridge Parkway mile post, and SNPMP - Shenandoah Rock, Devils Backbone, Striped Rock, and Lovers Leap, National Park mile post. range in elevation from Mt. Rogers at 5729 feet to As- This listing is primarily of those landforms named on sateague and Tangier islands near sea level. Two nat- topographic maps. It is hoped that the reader will advise ural lakes occur in Virginia, Mountain Lake in Giles the Division of other noteworthy landforms in the st& County and Lake Drummond in the City of Chesapeake. that are not mentioned. For those features on private Gaps through the mountains were important routes for land always obtain the owner's permission before vis- early settlers and positions for military movements dur- iting. Some particularly interesting features are de- ing the Civil War. Today, many gaps are still important scribed in more detail below. locations of roads and highways. For this report, landforms are listed alphabetically Dismal Swamp (see Chesapeake, City of) by county or city. Features along county lines are de- The Dismal Swamp, located in southeastern Virginia, scribed in only one county with references in other ap- is about 10 to 11 miles wide and 15 miles long, and propriate counties.
    [Show full text]
  • MADISON CAVE ISOPOD (Antrolana Lira)
    MADISON CAVE ISOPOD (Antrolana lira) RECOVERY PLAN U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Hadley, Massachusetts MADISON CAVE ISOPOD (Antrolana lira) RECOVERY PLAN Prepared by: Daniel W. Fong Department ofBiology The American University Washington, D.C. for: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Sen’ice Northeast Region Hadley, Massachusetts Approved: Regional Direct , Northeast Region U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Date: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Madison Cave Isopod~t Recovery Plan CuRRENT STATUS: The Madison Cave isopod, Antrolana lira, is a subterranean freshwater crustacean endemic tothe Shenandoah Valley in Virginia. Thismonotypic genus is the only member ofthe family Cirolanidae found north of Texas. Until 1990,A. lira was known onlyfrom two sites, Madison Saltpetre Cave and a fissure near the cave; since June 1990, the isopod has been collectedfrom five additional sites. Althoughspecimens from all sevensites are morphologically identical, they probably represent more than one but less than seven genetic populations. Population size appears tobe extremely small at five ofthe species’ sevenoccurrence sites. The Madison Cave isopod was listed as a threatened species inNovember 1982. Urban and agricultural development threatens the quality of its groundwater habitat and thus its survival; inaddition, lack ofknowledge ofthe basic ecology ofthis isopod hinders the development ofplans for its management and protection. LIMrrING FACTORS AND HABrrATREQumxMErrrs: The Madison Cave isopod appears to have low reproductive potential, and the small population size at most ofits sitesindicates that it is highly sensitive to disturbance. The species, which is difficult to study and collect, is known only from areas where fissures descend to the groundwater table, thus allowing access to the surface ofunderground lakes, or deep karst aquifers.
    [Show full text]
  • A Checklist and Annotated Bibliography of the Subterranean Aquatic Fauna of Texas
    A CHECKLIST AND ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE SUBTERRANEAN AQUATIC FAUNA OF TEXAS JAMES R. REDDELL and ROBERT W. MITCHELL Texas Technological College WATER RESOURCES \ CENTER Lubbock, Texas WRC 69-6 INTERNATIONAL CENTER for ARID and August 1969 SEMI-ARID LAND STUDIES A CHECKLIST AND ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE SUBTERRANEAN AQUATIC FAUNA OF TEXAS James R. Reddell and Robert W. Mitchell Department of Biology Texas Tech University Lubbock, Texas INTRODUCTION In view of the ever-increasing interest in all studies relating to the water resources of Texas, we have found it timely to prepare this guide to the fauna and biological literature of our subterranean waters. The value of such a guide has already been demonstrated by Clark (1966) in his "Publications, Personnel, and Government Organizations Related to the Limnology, Aquatic Biology and Ichthyology of the Inland Waters of Texas". This publication dea ls primarily with inland surface waters, however, barely touching upon the now rather extensive literature which has accumulated on the biology of our subterranean waters. To state a n obvious fact, it is imperative that our underground waters receive the attention due them. They are one of our most important resources. Those subterranean waters for which biological data exi st are very un­ equally distributed in the state. The best known are those which are acces­ sible to collection and study via the entrances of caves. Even in cavernous regions there exist inaccessible deep aquifers which have yielded little in­ formation as yet. Biological data from the underground waters of non-cave rn­ ous areas are virtually non-existant.
    [Show full text]
  • Immature Stages of the Marbled Underwing, Catocala Marmorata (Noctuidae)
    JOURNAL OF THE LEPIDOPTERISTS' SOCIETY Volume 54 2000 Number 4 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society 54(4), 2000,107- 110 IMMATURE STAGES OF THE MARBLED UNDERWING, CATOCALA MARMORATA (NOCTUIDAE) JOHN W PEACOCK 185 Benzler Lust Road, Marion, Ohio 43302, USA AND LAWRE:-JCE F GALL Entomology Division, Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520, USA ABSTRACT. The immature stages of C. marmorata are described and illustrated for the first time, along with biological and foodplant notes. Additional key words: underwing moths, Indiana, life history, Populus heterophylla. The Marbled Underwing, Catocala marrrwrata Ed­ REARING NOTES wards 1864, is generally an uncommon species whose present center of distribution is the central and south Ova were secured from a worn female C. rnarmorata central United States east of the Mississippi River collected at a baited tree at 2300 CST on 11 September (Fig. 1d). Historically, the range of C. marmorata ex­ 1994, in Point Twp. , Posey Co., Indiana. The habitat is tended somewhat farther to the north, as far as south­ mesic lowland flatwoods, with internal swamps of two ern New England (open circles in Fig. Id; see Holland types: (1) buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis L.) 1903, Barnes & McDunnough 1918, Sargent 1976), (Rubiaceae), cypress (Taxodium distichum L. but the species has not been recorded from these lo­ (Richaud)) (Taxodiaceae), and swamp cottonwood calities in the past 50 years, and the reasons for its ap­ (Populus heterophylla L.); and (2) overcup oak (Quer­ parent range contraction remain unknown. cus lyrata Walt.) (Fagaceae) and swamp cottonwood. We are not aware of any previously published infor­ The female was confined in a large grocery bag (17.8 X mation on the early stages or larval foodplant(s) for C.
    [Show full text]
  • Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY
    Flora of the Carolinas, Virginia, and Georgia, Working Draft of 17 March 2004 -- BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackerfield, J., and J. Wen. 2002. A morphometric analysis of Hedera L. (the ivy genus, Araliaceae) and its taxonomic implications. Adansonia 24: 197-212. Adams, P. 1961. Observations on the Sagittaria subulata complex. Rhodora 63: 247-265. Adams, R.M. II, and W.J. Dress. 1982. Nodding Lilium species of eastern North America (Liliaceae). Baileya 21: 165-188. Adams, R.P. 1986. Geographic variation in Juniperus silicicola and J. virginiana of the Southeastern United States: multivariant analyses of morphology and terpenoids. Taxon 35: 31-75. ------. 1995. Revisionary study of Caribbean species of Juniperus (Cupressaceae). Phytologia 78: 134-150. ------, and T. Demeke. 1993. Systematic relationships in Juniperus based on random amplified polymorphic DNAs (RAPDs). Taxon 42: 553-571. Adams, W.P. 1957. A revision of the genus Ascyrum (Hypericaceae). Rhodora 59: 73-95. ------. 1962. Studies in the Guttiferae. I. A synopsis of Hypericum section Myriandra. Contr. Gray Herbarium Harv. 182: 1-51. ------, and N.K.B. Robson. 1961. A re-evaluation of the generic status of Ascyrum and Crookea (Guttiferae). Rhodora 63: 10-16. Adams, W.P. 1973. Clusiaceae of the southeastern United States. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 89: 62-71. Adler, L. 1999. Polygonum perfoliatum (mile-a-minute weed). Chinquapin 7: 4. Aedo, C., J.J. Aldasoro, and C. Navarro. 1998. Taxonomic revision of Geranium sections Batrachioidea and Divaricata (Geraniaceae). Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 85: 594-630. Affolter, J.M. 1985. A monograph of the genus Lilaeopsis (Umbelliferae). Systematic Bot. Monographs 6. Ahles, H.E., and A.E.
    [Show full text]